-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Monomania
,----[ Quote ]
| But the problem is that Mono is dangerous for
| Free Software. The heart of the matter is, as
| usual, software patents. Microsoft have patents
| on the technology inside .NET, and since the
| Tom Tom lawsuit, Microsoft have shown they are
| not averse to attacking Free Software using
| patent infringement claims. Microsoft have
| tried to allay some fears by putting the .NET
| specification under their "Microsoft Community
| Promise" which you can read here:
|
| http://www.microsoft.com/interop/cp/default.mspx
|
| Miguel hailed this a the solution to all the
| patent problems with Mono. But this promise is
| simply not good enough to base a language
| environment implementation upon. After all, if
| the rug is pulled out from under that
| implementation by the threat of patent
| infringement you don't just lose the
| implementation itself, you lose all the
| programs that depend upon it. That's a really
| dangerous situation for Free Software programs
| to be in. The Free Software Foundation wrote a
| good analysis of the problems with this promise
| here:
|
| http://www.fsf.org/news/2009-07-mscp-mono
|
| But my basic issue with the Microsoft Community
| Promise is that Miguel doesn't have to depend
| on it like everyone else does. Miguel's
| employer, Novell, has a patent agreement with
| Microsoft that exempts Mono users from
| Microsoft patent aggression, so long as you get
| Mono from Novell.
|
| [...]
|
| Microsoft isn't playing games any more by
| merely threatening to assert patents. Real
| lawsuits have now occurred and the gloves are
| off against Free Software. Moving Mono and its
| applications to the "restricted" repositories
| is now just plain common sense.
`----
http://tuxdeluxe.org/node/299
Mono is a trap â evidence
,----[ Quote ]
| Still arenât convinced that Mono is a trap
| which ultimately only benefits Microsoft?
|
| Take a look at this âHighly Confidentialâ
| document from Microsoft (from Comes vs
| Microsoft case) entitled âEffective Evangelismâ
| and decide for yourself. It exposes Microsoftâs
| game plan for dominating the market with their
| platforms (which we already know, but some
| choose to ignore).
`----
http://blog.christophersmart.com/2009/10/15/mono-is-a-trap-evidence/
Recent:
Miguel snuggles closer to Microsoft
,----[ Quote ]
| De Icaza himself has no qualms about pointing
| out that he was kicked off the board of the FSF
| for "refusing to be an active part" in what he
| says was a campaign to rename Linux as
| GNU/Linux. This sits somewhat at variance with
| the glowing descrption of him as an open source
| advocate but never mind.
|
| [...]
|
| The CodePlex Foundation is a commercial entity.
| The board, set up under the non-profit rules of
| Washington State, has complete control over the
| foundation and is also self-perpetuating,
| according to a detailed analysis by Andy
| Updegrove.
|
| The motives of the foundation are pretty clear:
| to enable "the exchange of code and
| understanding among software companies and open
| source communities."
`----
http://www.itwire.com/content/view/27785/1090/1/1/
The H Gives Mono a Health Check
,----[ Quote ]
| Next, it reinforces the point that Mr. de Icaza was totally serious back when
| he said that âGnome 4.0 should be based on .NETâ â thatâs exactly what he
| thought then, and exactly what he thinks now. Itâs dressed up a bit in
| pseudo-technical rhetoric, but the underlying desire is the same.
`----
http://mono-nono.com/2009/08/21/the-h-gives-mono-a-health-check/
Health Check: Mono - Too much monkey business?
,----[ Quote ]
| This stance has been countered to some degree by Microsoft's Community
| Promise, but doubts remain as to what is actually covered, and de Icaza
| concedes as much. "In the next few months," he wrote, "we will be working
| towards splitting the jumbo Mono source code that includes ECMA + A lot more
| into two separate source code distributions. One will be ECMA, the other will
| contain our implementation of ASP.NET, ADO.NET, Winforms and others." In
| theory, the core components of Mono and the Mono development stack for Gnome
| are covered by the Community Promise. The elements that provide compatibility
| with Windows are not.
|
| From the beginning Mono has been beset by misunderstandings, misconceptions
| and political ineptitude, not least by Novell, de Icaza's employer, which
| allowed Microsoft to insert patent indemnification into its commercial
| agreement of 2006, souring its relationship with the free software community
| and giving Microsoft grounds for suggesting, without substantiation, that
| GNU/Linux and other free software infringed Microsoft patents - and by
| Microsoft's ongoing ambivalence towards free and open source software within
| its own halls.
`----
http://www.h-online.com/open/Health-Check-Mono--/features/114041/0
Pro-mono Zealotry
,----[ Quote ]
| What this does illustrate, I think, is something that is already obvious to
| anyone that has been following the Mono controversy: there are people that
| are just as âextremeâ and unwilling to listen to reason as the most zealoty
| charactertures painted by the Broad Brush of the Most High and (Self)
| Righteous Community Gatekeepers.
|
| You can spot these people by the mindless regurgitation of other peopleâs
| talking points and the inability to make even the slightest concession to any
| opposing argument; the gleeful participation in any manner of attack or
| disinformation; the uncritical embrace of anyone or anything that supports
| thier position. A sure sign is charging the opposition with the very crimes
| they themselves are in the act of commiting.
`----
http://mono-nono.com/2009/07/30/pro-mono-zealotry/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAkrXcRcACgkQU4xAY3RXLo4TDACgmIdszpTfUL6G+5pjbwP2dsqA
5VQAn3qE5CdXb8AgBL7maebAIf2g1qd1
=3BOw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
|
